Categories
authority church church function church organization

God’s “House-Law”

Wednesday’s Column: “Third’s Words”

Gary Pollard

Every home has some kind of system in place to keep order. Maybe you were told to take your shoes off at the door, keep your elbows off the table, make your bed in the morning, or brush your teeth more than twice a month. Every home is different and the expectations for conduct and cleanliness vary accordingly. However your home was structured, you were at least bound to a set of rules in some form.

God’s house is no different. I’m not just talking about the building we meet in for worship, but that anytime His family offers up worship to Him we are expected to follow His rules. I Timothy 1.4 talks about God’s “house-law” (often mistranslated “stewardship” or “godly edification”). The word is οικονομία (oikonomia), combining οίκος (house) with νόμος (law). What does this mean in context? In I Timothy Paul publicly berates two members who were teaching “myths and endless genealogies which do not promote the house law of God in faith” (1.3, 4; 20).

If any teaching goes against what God has told us He wants, it’s a violation of His house-law. We understand this when it comes to daily life outside of religious activities. If we break the law we are held accountable to it. We understand that violating the laws our governments put in place to maintain order and promote justice carries consequences. Some, though, do not act as if the same applies to God’s people in a religious context.

God’s house-law is more specifically defined in I Timothy 2.1-8. Anytime and anywhere Christian men and women offer worship together, God expects qualified Christian men to lead. This is made clear with the phrase, “…in every place” (2.8). God’s house, God’s rules.

Not just any man can lead, though! He must be someone who is able to lift holy hands (that is, he is pure in life and can offer worship without the stain of sin), he must be cool-headed, and he can’t be unstable in his faith (2.8). God’s house, God’s rules.

God expects women to avoid drawing undue attention to themselves (2.9, 10) and are to allow godly men to lead them in worship (2.11-14). His house, his rules.

In all of my vast wisdom and experience as a child, I didn’t always agree with or like all of my family’s house rules. Probably every teen and their unfortunate parents experience this. My feelings about a house rule did not alter its validity in any way. It was not my house so I was not in a position to change or violate the rules. Trying to do so was not only futile but often carried consequences.

God’s design for His church is not acceptable to the secular world. In their disagreement or downright hostility toward it they have pushed many churches into changing God’s house-laws. This doesn’t fly in the legal world, the home, or in any setting where rules were set in place by those most qualified to make them. Why would it work with God?

We may not always understand why God made the laws that He did, but this is where the faith aspect of 1 Timothy 1.4 comes into play. We have to ask ourselves, “Do we trust that God knew what He was doing when He made these laws, and do I really want to challenge Him on the rules He made for His own family?” At the end of the day we must remember that in God’s house we follow God’s laws. Many of the problems facing the church in 2020 can be solved simply by accepting this fact! If we do – as in any family – we will not only have harmony in the church, but a permanent, peaceful home with God after this life.

Job 38.4-7

Categories
eternal life eternity righteousness soul Uncategorized

THE WORLD’S MOST IMPORTANT CHASE

Neal Pollard

It’s hard to believe that it was 25 years ago today that Orenthal James (O.J.) Simpson led Los Angeles police on a low-speed chase. The infamous white Bronco took off on the day he was supposed to turn himself into police, a suspect in the deaths of his wife Nicole and her friend Ron Goldman. The chase went on for 75 miles and two hours. The drama on this day in history led to the more infamous trial that ultimately led to Simpson’s acquittal. Despite what seemed a mountain of evidence against him, Simpson went free until, ironically, he was charged in an armed robbery case in 2008 that him imprisoned until two years ago (some facts via cbsnews.com). 

The Bible records several notable chases:

  • Laban and Jacob (Gen. 31:26)
  • Esau and Jacob (Gen. 32)
  • The Egyptians and the Israelites (Josh. 24:6). 
  • Barak and Sisera (Jud. 4:22). 
  • Asahel and Abner (2 Sam. 2:19). 
  • Saul and David (1 Sam. 23:25). 
  • Absalom and David (2 Sam. 16-17). 
  • Joab’s men and Sheba (2 Sam. 20). 
  • Benaiah and the lion (1 Chr. 11:22).

These pursuits were the result of military conflict, personal vendettas, and familial disputes, but they all were matters of life and death. Many other chases outside of the biblical record are famous, from the great locomotive chase of 1862 to the exploits of Lawrence of Arabia in the Middle East during World War I.  But, there is a chase with infinitely more at stake than any of the ones I’ve mentioned already. What is it?

Paul says, “But flee from these things, you man of God, and pursue righteousness, godliness, faith, love, perseverance and gentleness” (1 Tim. 6:11). Paul tells Timothy that so many people pursue material things, and their love for such is the cause of their own hurt and destruction. So, Paul encourages Timothy to run from those things and run after those qualities that lead to eternal life (6:12-13), preparation for the appearing of the Lord Jesus Christ (6:14), and storing up the treasure of a good foundation for the future and life indeed (6:19). All of us are either chasing the things of this world, which pierce us through with many sorrows, or the things of the world to come, where eternal life awaits those who pursue it. 

800px-1990_ford_bronco_front

Categories
church church function women's role

Baptized Boys And Bible Class

Neal Pollard

1 Timothy 2:11-14 clearly states, “A woman must quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness. But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve. 14 And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression.” Herein, God through Paul limits the role of woman in the work and corporate function of the church. Therefore, she is not to have authority over the man–in whatever circumstance that applies (be it Bible class, worship, matters of organization, i.e., deacons, elders, preachers, etc., or in the home). The loud voices of feminism notwithstanding, God has clearly spoken. This matter is not cultural. It is a principle that goes all the way back to Eden.

However, an unfortunate conclusion drawn by some based on this text (and others, like 1 Corinthians 11:3 or 14:34, for example) is that a Christian woman cannot teach a baptized boy in a Bible class. There are several reasons why this conclusion is flawed.

First, it misses who is in included in 1 Timothy 2:12. The Greek word translated “man” is the verse specially means “man, husband, sir.” All males are not under consideration. The Greek has words for child, including “infant” or “half-grown child” (Mat. 2:21), “child,” “son” or “daughter” (Mat. 10:21), and “young man” (Mat. 17:18). None of those words is used in 1 Timothy 2:12. The Holy Spirit chose the specific word meaning “adult man.”  Boys eleven or twelve are not men!

Next, none practice this conviction in the home. If we believed 1 Timothy 2:12 taught that baptized boys were men, then we should also teach that their mothers can no longer instruct, admonish, or “be over” them as parents. If that adolescent son invites another baptized boy to spend the night, can this Christian mother “have authority” over the visiting boy? If this woman can teach her son the Bible at home, why can she not teach him in a Bible classroom at the building? In this case, what makes it wrong in the classroom would make it wrong at home. If not, why not?

Then, a baptized boy is nowhere else considered a man. He is not considered such to the military, the corporate world, at home, at school, to the DMV, or anywhere else. His status has changed in that, if he is truly accountable, he has gone from lost to saved. However, the water no more makes a boy a man than it makes a woman a man.

It is not sinful to personally hold the conviction that a Christian woman should not teach a baptized boy. It is not wrong for the elders, in their judgment, to have men teaching Bible classes where there are any baptized boys. Yet, we had better be careful not to bind an opinion as truth. When boys reach their teenage years and undergo the process of changing into men, it is wise to place Christian men over them in the classroom. At some point, he matures to the point of manhood and 1 Timothy 2:11-12 would forbid a woman to teach him. Yet, having a woman teach a baptized, prepubescent boy in a Bible class is not “questionable” or “unsafe.” He is still a boy in the classroom, just as he is anywhere outside of it.

Categories
blogging clothing modesty

Veronica Partridge’s Proclamation

Neal Pollard

On January 5, Veronica Partridge, “Christian Blogger,” posted an article entitled, “Why I Chose To No Longer Wear Leggings.”  Her essential answer was that she did not want to dress in a way that would potentially make someone other than her husband to “think lustfully about” her body (www.veronicapartridge.com).  How do I know about the blog?  I did not even know who she was until I was running on the treadmill this morning and Good Morning America was running a story about it.  Then, in Googling “Veronica Partridge Leggings,” I saw that such websites as “Huffington Post,” “New York Daily News,” and “The Inquisitr” have written opinion pieces about her words.  Just what is visible from the Google result reveals that they do not necessarily appreciate her point of view.  What is her point of view?

She spoke to her husband and asked if an attractive woman in form-fitting pants was in view, did it present a potential heart struggle for him.  He said it did, and at the end of her post she wrote, “And at that moment, I made a personal vow to myself and to my husband. I will no longer wear thin, form-fitting yoga pants or leggings in public….I also want to set the best example of how to dress for my daughter. I want her to know, her value is not in the way her body looks or how she dresses, but in the character and personality God has given her” (ibid.).

The commenters in response to her blog said some of the same things I’ve heard people say in response to sermons I’ve heard preached or that I’ve preached on modesty.  “It’s not the woman’s fault if the man chooses to lust.” “If a guy’s going to lust, it doesn’t matter what the woman is wearing.” “Who defines modesty?”  Truly, this is a difficult matter to preach or teach well.  Why?

  • People have different standards of what is modest and immodest.
  • Some women are unaware of how revealing or provocative some items of clothing are for most men.
  • Some men may pressure or persuade their wives and daughters to dress in such a way.
  • Some women may like how certain men look at them when they are dressed in such a way.
  • It is human nature to place what we see as our own “rights” over how our exercise of such “rights” negatively effects others.

Those not interested in pleasing God will not be moved by biblical passages and principles.  For those who are, here are some things to consider.

  1. 1 Timothy 2:9 calls for the Christian woman to adorn themselves with proper clothing, modestly and discreetly.  In context, she violated this with ostentatious clothing that blinded people to her adornment of good works and claims of godliness.  If “overdressing” does this, can “underdressing” do this?
  2. 1 Peter 3:2-4 ties together chaste and respectful behavior with clothing that draws attention not to the external but to “the hidden person of the heart.”  Is there ever a line where one’s clothing leaves the realm of the chaste (not have sexual nature or intention) and enters the realm of the immoral?
  3. Matthew 5:28-32 says that a man who looks at a woman with lust for her has sinned.  This is the man’s responsibility, but is it ever possible that a woman can so clothe (or not clothe) herself in such a way as create a stumbling block for him in this regard (cf. Mat. 18:7).

There are some items of clothing that are definitely chaste and modest.  Surely, most everyone would say that there are some items of clothing that are definitely not.  What God’s people must do is give serious thought to such things and do that which gives them the best chance to promote Christ.  This is but one area, but it is one area.

Categories
woman

BEAUTY MARKS

Neal Pollard
God made women as one of His crowning achievements of beauty, and I am blessed to be married to one of His finest samples of this. They are called the “fairer sex” for obvious reasons. This was obvious from the first generation of man (Gen. 2:22-23). While Solomon extolled the physical beauty of his wife in Song of Solomon and King Lemuel’s mother extolled the intellectual beauty of the virtuous woman in Proverbs 31, Paul, a single man, and Peter, a married man, are led in their writing by the Holy Spirit to identify three distinct beauty marks of God’s ideal woman.
“Good Works” (1 Tim. 2:10). This mark is set in contrast with the immodesty of ungodliness in 1 Timothy 2:9. Whether overdressing or under dressing, the ungodly woman accentuates her outward self. This is not true beauty. Paul says being adorned with good works covers her with true loveliness. When a Christian lady is engrossed in good works, visiting, teaching ladies and children in Bible classes, soul-winning, or as context emphasizes (2:15), fulfilling her role if possible in the home raising children, she is a rare beauty. There are countless good works in which she can be engaged for Christ and the church. In doing these, she reveals remarkable beauty.
“A Gentle And Quiet Spirit” (1 Pet. 3:4). In 1 Peter, Peter makes some statements quite similar to Paul’s. Notice first that Peter, like Paul, preaches a message that could not be more different from the world’s sermon. The world tells a woman to allow herself to be a sexual object for men, to flaunt what she has, and to be provocative in her dress and manner. Peter tells her to accentuate chaste conduct and fear (3:2) and the “hidden person of the heart” (3:4). This is “incorruptible beauty,” literally not subject to decay. One thing I have observed through the years is that the godly woman grows more beautiful with age, the wrinkles and other marks of age not marring her appearance one bit. Her godly disposition, disciplined righteousness, and spiritual greatness beautify her in a way Cover Girl or Oil of Olay absolutely could not! Her friendliness and tranquility attract in an ageless way.
“Holy And Trusting” (1 Pet. 3:5). Peter mentions another beauty mark in his description of God’s stunning woman. She is like Sarah and other Old Testament women of righteousness. She is holy, meaning she lives near to God and far from the world. What truer beauty is there? She hopes for God, suggesting that she counts on Him and puts her confidence in Him. The world’s ideal woman boasts of her self-sufficiency, self-reliance, self-confidence, and self-making. Selfish persons of either gender are decidedly unattractive. But, the Christian woman appears beautiful through her dependency upon God and His ways.
Paul reminds us that despite our “beauty products” and cosmetic surgeries, the outward person is running down and wearing out (2 Cor. 4:16). There is nothing wrong with keeping in good physical shape (1 Tim. 4:8) or taking care of our physical appearance. However, let God’s woman be convinced that the things mentioned by Paul and Peter in these verses cause her to win the beauty contest in which God the Lord is the judge.

Categories
eldership leadership

Submitting To Elders

Neal Pollard

Elders are not infallible, and most of the men I’ve known who serve as elders do not think they are.  On the whole, the rank and file of elders I have known are humble, selfless, sacrificial, magnanimous, and spiritual men who embrace the often difficult work of herding and leading that often strong-willed species of us known in biblical terms as “sheep.”  They are so often second-guessed and may be the most commonly backbitten group of people among God’s people.  I have found that there are a few—sadly too often a “vocal minority”—who, in practice, are hesitant to submit to eldership’s decisions.  In my experience, here are some of the reasons why:

  • They do not agree with the judgment call(s) made by the eldership
  • They do not understand why the elders have decided as they have
  • They feel they would or could handle a situation better than the elders did
  • They feel that they would be immune from perceived pressures or weaknesses
  • They see some deficiency in them

Such attitudes are very frustrating to encounter.  I would go so far as say that these are bad attitudes.  They reflect more on the sheep than the shepherds. Here is what they often fail to understand:

  • The elders probably have privy to more information than they do
  • They are likely privy to sensitive information they cannot share
  • They are almost always involved in more than anyone else
  • Since they will give an account to God for their work, they face the reality of making choices for which they have to answer
  • They submitted to a congregational process and found qualified to lead
  • We are commanded to submit to them, and that necessarily implies in matters of judgment even when we do not agree with their judgment

The vast majority of elders are sensitive to the concerns and objections they hear from the sheep.  Should we not exercise an equal measure of humility, selflessness, sacrifice, magnanimity and spirituality in our words and attitudes regarding our shepherds?  Remember, “Obey those who rule over you, and be submissive, for they watch out for your souls, as those who must give account. Let them do so with joy and not with grief, for that would be unprofitable for you” (Heb. 13:17).

 

Categories
Bear Valley church of Christ Daily Bread Neal Pollard Pollard blog Uncategorized

GODLINESS IN 1 TIMOTHY

Neal Pollard

  • We are to be godly in relationship to the world (2:1-7)
  • We are to be godly in relationship to our roles in the church, men and then women (2:8-15)
  • We are to be godly in relationship to the church by leadership (3:1-13)
  • We are to be godly in relationship to Christ (3:13-16)
  • We are to be godly in relationship to doctrine (4:1-6)
  • We are to be godly in relationship to priorities (4:7-16)
  • We are to be godly in relationship to family matters (5:1-16)–specific here is widow care and her need to be godly
  • We are to be godly in relationship to leaders by members (5:17-26)
  • We are to be godly in relationship to financial matters (6:1-19)
  • We are to be godly in relationship to self (6:20-21)